Musicians and music educators who do not know how to improvise usually have the wrong idea about what it means to improvise. They think a jazz musician is making up new melodies on the spot. Do jazz musicians invent spontaneous, brand new musical ideas while improvising? Not really. Improvisation is not so much creating something new as it is creatively organizing melodic ideas that have been learned previously.

On the one hand I feel bad tearing away the mystical sense of awe that often surrounds a great jazz soloist. But on the other hand, I delight in revealing to the world some of the secrets that make improvisation realistically attainable to every common musician. Perhaps the greatest secret of all is what I have already alluded to: an improviser is not truly CREATING so much as she is ORGANIZING. This is a very important distinction, because it means that a person does not have to become amazingly creative, he just has to practice enough to gather and memorize hundreds of melodic ideas that can be uniquely organized for each "improvised" solo. Jazz musicians may object to this notion that they are not playing or expressing spontaneous, new melodies when improvising, but I am not saying that they are NOT doing this. I am simply saying that their ability to do this is derived far MORE from PERSPIRATION and far LESS from INSPIRATION than they may want us to believe. In good improvisation there is definitely an element of playing by ear - being able to play on the instrument ideas that come into your head. However, I would dare say that nearly every idea that comes into your head is something you have either heard or practiced before, so again you are only reorganizing...not inventing. How does an artist paint? She gets her brushes and oils and a clean canvas, and creates a work that is made from hundreds of strokes that she has learned well through practice. How does a quarterback make a touchdown pass? He executes a play that has been practiced to near perfection. He certainly doesn't invent a brand new play in the heat of the contest. Is there room for artistry in the execution of the play? Certainly. How about one more comparison. How does a chef create someone's meal? Typically by following a recipe. However, if he wants to create something new on the spot, he will only use ingredients that he has an intimate knowledge of. Thus, the recipe may be unique, but it is still only a creative combination of available materials. The way that the artist, quarterback, and chef do their creative work is perfectly and directly comparable to how a jazz musician improvises. A jazz musician simply takes the melodic ideas and patterns that they have learned to sing and/or play and places them in the right key, organizing and connecting them with some degree of artistry. Charlie Parker practiced the saxophone for 11-15 hours a day for over 3 years in order to become "The Bird". What did he practice? Did he practice making up new melodies all day long? No, he practiced scales and patterns. He practiced his scales until he could play them faster than many thought humanly possible. And he transcribed solos and learned to play his favorite licks (or patterns as I call them) fluently in every key. Armed with these raw materials, he was finally able to stand up and play an incredible solo. And, because he possessed a degree of "inspiration", his "perspiration" not only made him into a great jazz musician, but also allowed him to take jazz into a new direction as a leading figure in the "be-bop" movement.

An internationally acclaimed contemporary jazz saxophonist, Seamus Blake, is a great case study for the typical jazz musician. He says, "I began, as most saxophonists do, by imitating all the great masters. I learned solos by John Coltrane, Sonny Rollins, Dexter Gordon, Joe Hendserson, Charlie Parker, Cannonball Adderley, Ben Webster, and many more. Even today, my sound has varying degrees of influence from all thos players, but earlier on it was much more derivative. Sometimes I would play entire phrases lifted from Parker or Coltrane, but after awhile I began to edit myself." (interview in JAZZed Magazine, November 2011) See? From the very beginning, and even now, the great Seamus Blake is playing stuff that he LEARNED through PRACTICE and through copying the ideas of others. He is organizing, not creating from nothing. Whenever I hear an amazing young jazz soloist, I inevitably hear from his teacher that she is a great player because she practices 3-4 hours a day. Improvisers are not BORN that way. They are MADE through hours and hours of dedication to mastering scales and patterns. Certainly, as in athletics, some people are more naturally gifted than others in various ways. However, I firmly believe that ALL students and ALL music educators can learn to improvise, and can improvise well over a few simple chord changes with just dozens (not hundreds) of hours of practice. It can be a delightful journey and a satisfying way to engage with music. It requires a very practical understanding of music theory...more so than is utilized in simply reading and playing written music. It is one of the 9 National Standards all students should experience in their music education. And now, with the Improv Pathways classroom jazz improvisation method, it is very, very achievable. Curtis Winters

Yes! Many people and even teachers think they can teach us scales and modes and we somehow magically will create amazing solos, even though we don't know the jazz language. Also, it doesn't matter if you put in 10+ hours a day, like I did because it got me nowhere. You can spend your time inventing phrases from scales and then trying to internalize them to play at high speeds, or you can imitate the masters and over time massage them to your own liking. The Imitate, Assimilate, Innovate theory espoused by Clark Terry.

It seems to be stating the obvious, but I guess it needs to be stated because so many people just don't "get it" about improvisation and jazz. Stan Getz said it best: "It’s like a language. You learn the alphabet, which are the scales. You learn sentences, which are the chords. And then you talk extemporaneously with the horn. It’s a wonderful thing to speak extemporaneously, which is something I’ve never gotten the hang of. But musically I love to talk just off the top of my head. And that’s what jazz music is all about." After all, you didn't make up all new words to write your article, you used the existing language and syntax to express your ideas. This is what good jazz players do, and the best jazz players take that language and syntax and transform it in unexpected ways to create something new.

Now in defense of the tendency for jazz educators to be overly concerned with scales, modes, arpeggios and such, I believe that you need to understand the context in which their methodology developed. Up until the 50s and 60s, MOST jazz musicians had received most (if not ALL) of their musical training somewhat informally by imitating their heros and playing on the bandstand. Where they were often deficient was in the area of scales, modes, theory, etc., so the people who were defining the framework for teaching the music were doing so in this context. It NEVER dawned on them that someday there would be a generation of players who grew up hearing rock music and had no concept of standard tunes and melodies, jazz phrasing, etc. (and this is kind of where we are today). It's analogous to giving people the tools and telling them to build a "house" when they've got no idea what a "house" is supposed to look like,

And so I suppose the pendulum is going to swing back in the opposite direction . . . .

Thanks, Rick, for this interesting post and wonderful quote by Stan Getz. Indeed learning to improvise requires a balanced approach of many different elements of "language learning". You have to learn the letters, the words, the syntax, the rules of creating complete sentences, paragraphs, and papers. Then you have to read some poetry and some prose and imitate the styles you love the most. You also have to learn to type on a computer keyboard and to format documents.

I believe strongly that my approach in Improv Pathways is balanced and complete. It includes scales & patterns with ear training and transcribing. It develops ear-to-hand coordination as well as muscle memory of sequential patterns and licks. It encourages listening to the masters along with memorizing guide tone patterns over chord progressions. It helps students understand the ins and outs of music theory and chord symbols. Etc., etc. I hope it does not represent only a single pendulum swinging more strongly in the "other" direction. I'm actually not sure exactly what aspect you were referring to in that phrase, but would welcome more clarification and posts from you. Obviously you are thoughtful and well-informed. I appreciate you taking the time to read and comment here.

I don't understand why some players are so put off when someone points out that YES, there are people who can "compose" in real time - and this is the highest form of improvisation. I'm not saying these great musicians don't resort to licks, patterns, etc. - sometimes. But it's spontaneous composition, ideally, and some do it a good deal of the time they're playing. The fact that most can't doesn't matter. Listen to Julian Lage; Chris Thile; Mark O'Connor; Matt Glaser; Bela Fleck; Mick Goodrick; John Abercrombie, et al.

I certainly agree that jazz players are indeed "composing in real time". However, I disagree with the notion that "resorting to licks, patterns, etc." is NOT composing in real time, as long as the musician is not playing something written or memorized. Yes, some people are more creative and interesting than others. However, if you analyze any solo by the musicians listed (Bela Flexk, Julian Lage, etc.) you could make a solid case that every single group of notes in the solo has been practiced before - whether as an arpeggio, a scale pattern, or a lick.
In VOCAL solos this may not be the case. However, on a musical instrument you just can't produce notes or groups of notes without first teaching your body how to produce them through practice. Thus, I feel that Mr. Lewis and I are in total agreement about everything, except for this small difference of definition.
Thank you, David A. Lewis, for your interesting and insightful post, and for the great listening recommendations!

I guess I am a music moron, because I just don't get it when it comes to the traditional approach to learning via scales and articulations and I am totally lost when it comes to chord changes and key changing with them. It seems like I have some tools, like a ratchet, extension, and sockets, but can't figure out how to put them together to get at that bolt.
I am going to try using the pathways method and work on specific melodies to disassemble and reassemble them piece by piece using phrasings I like as tools, but keeping strong ties to the melodic lines. It seems like I do better that way because I can feel what needs to go where.

I suffered for years from the same kind of confusion - I had a LOT of tools, but could not figure out how to use them when soloing or when facing chord changes. I hope that using Improv Pathways helps you to make some great progress. Be sure to listen and play along with the CD tracks - essential for true understanding and skill development. Thanks for taking the time to post!

Reply

Leave a Reply.

Categories

Author

Curtis Winters is a public school jazz educator at Orem Junior High, in Orem, UT. He has created the Improv Pathways method to make it easy to teach jazz improvisation during regular jazz band rehearsals.